If you are so concerned for the well being and precious nature of toeskr and his concern that guns prevent him from turning gay, then why do you display so little compassion for the victims of gun violence?

Any reasonable and responsible person has absolutely nothing to lose or fear from discussion on greater gun control or indeed the implementation of such laws that have been enacted in the likes of Australia, UK, Japan and Germany. Basically you still get to own and waggle your pew pew toy but perhaps not a military grade firearm unless it is totally in the confines, usage and storage, of a strictly regulated club. A place where you all can hang together pulling on each other's triggers if that is so essential for your masculinity.

Yes, I have fired guns from pellet air guns, 22 and 303 rifles - under supervised situations as a young teenager. Nope - not even a tingle.

My stance on this subject has been thoroughly consistent every time the gun masturbators appear on Literotica How to... If this is indeed an uncontrollable fetish then there is a board here for a whole broad range of fetishes.

A reasonable and responsible person has nothing to fear from reasonable and responsible gun control.

Yes - I do believe this thread is well beyond the spirit of the How To... and most definitely be moved to the General Board.

Ah yes, reasonable and responsible, two terms people on the pro-control side toss around to attempt to make a point. I fear nothing from a discussion, I just don't care for the repeated name calling and lack of imagination.

"you still get to own and waggle your pew pew toy" shows no desire for a rational discussionand again descends into attempting ridicule of the other side of an argument. And another comment about masculinity. How predictable.

Now as to the abundance of links you've provided, well, I do have a question.

Why is it gun violence that drives you to such an emotional rage? Take a look at this and tell me what you think...

**
There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
• 65% of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws
• 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified
• 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – gun violence
• 3% are accidental discharge deaths
So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?
• 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
• 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
• 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
• 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, so it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equally, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault all is done by criminals and thinking that criminals will obey laws is ludicrous. That's why they are criminals.
But what about other deaths each year?
• 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
• 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths
• 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide)
Now it gets good:
• 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital!
• 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If Obama and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides......Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions!
So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple.:
Taking away guns gives control to governments.
The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs.
So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force at the command of Congress can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power."
Remember, when it comes to "gun control," the important word is “control," not “gun."
**

In previous statements I've made, which were never answered by the way, I discussed the different point of view that Americans had versus the rest of the world. Perhaps you should read that again, then maybe you would understand better.

Another question is about gun violence in movies. The people that make the movies are vehmently against gun violence, yet they still churn out movie after movie glorifying it. Why?

We have shockingly bad cities here, with incredibly strict gun control laws and rampant crime. Laws which only affect the lawful have not worked, yet those people in power who push the control agenda (and have armed security) want more of the same. That doesn't make sense.

You support greater laws everywhere, yet compared to other health issues, it is not nearly as devastating. Yet the masses seem to ignore more dangerous issues in favor of the highly visible and emotional one.

You may not have advociated for abolition, but people here certainly have. Our beloved politicians have oft commented on their desire to get rid of them all. Pelosi and Feinstein are two great examples.

I think the only one who thinks it is an uncontrollable fetish is you and your group, if the name calling and insults are any indication.

First you must define 'reasonable and responsible'. We have tried assault weapons bans, magazine bans, city-wide bans, law after law after law and you know what? Those darned criminals just keep breaking the law, causing the lawful to suffer. We have seen the downward slope (Recently in Massachusetts, they introduced new legislation to eliminate a grandfathering of magazines that hold more than ten rounds. No indication magazine capacity does anything, but let's ban it! Much like their state specific rifle bans. I believe two were used in a crime in the past ten years, but hey, let's ban them for everyone!) that the control crowd desires, and the lack of accomplishing anything other than a higher restriction on rights.

You take a look at all of that, and Chicago and Baltimore, what the lawmakers have done and the effect it has had on the citizens.

So let us get specific, what exactly would you propose in the ways of laws and restrictions? What do you think would have an effect on gun violence rates? What do you think would cause a reduction of criminal behavior?

We love guns that kill people. Let us dance.
We love guns that kill people. Let us dance.
We love guns that kill people. Let us dance.
We love guns that kill people. Let us dance.
We love guns that kill people. Let us dance.
We love guns that kill people. Let us dance.
We love guns that kill people. Let us dance.
We love guns that kill people. Let us dance.
We love guns that kill people. Let us dance.
We love guns that kill people. Let us dance.
We love guns that kill people. Let us dance.
We love guns that kill people. Let us dance.
We love guns that kill people. Let us dance.
We love guns that kill people. Let us dance.

Every person who espouses the glorification of guns has their finger on the next trigger.

Every person who espouses the glorification of guns has their finger on the next trigger.

Your lack of rationality is astounding.

You might as well say every person who doesn't want to ban trucks has their foot on the next gas pedal.

Every person who doesn't want to ban knives has their hand on the next blade?

Every person who doesn't want to ban hammers has their hand on the next assault?

According to you, we need more laws, that will solve everything. (Actually, I don't know what is according to you, as you refuse to answer straightforward questions.)

If only we had a law against, you know, murder.

Don't you find it the least bit strange that for other crime, we blame the person who is actually committing it, but if a gun is involved people blame the object used by the criminal? Why is that I wonder?

I await what I am sure will be either deafening silence or another emotional name-calling outburst.

You might as well say every person who doesn't want to ban trucks has their foot on the next gas pedal.

Every person who doesn't want to ban knives has their hand on the next blade?

Every person who doesn't want to ban hammers has their hand on the next assault?

According to you, we need more laws, that will solve everything. (Actually, I don't know what is according to you, as you refuse to answer straightforward questions.)

If only we had a law against, you know, murder.

Don't you find it the least bit strange that for other crime, we blame the person who is actually committing it, but if a gun is involved people blame the object used by the criminal? Why is that I wonder?

I await what I am sure will be either deafening silence or another emotional name-calling outburst.

Dealing with Nl reminds me of a saying, "ignorance can be treated, stupidity is forever". She is a prime example.

Best of luck to her crusade to change lit and the threads to her liking.

Reducing a 3 year old child gunned down in a carseat by a citizen exercising his 2A rights to a number is morally dubious, and that's being generous. The 2nd has a human cost.

__________________
"We need to make books cool again. If you go home with somebody and they don't have books, don't fuck them." John Waters
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction.” Mark Twain
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." Molly Ivins

Maybe someone will jump in to help but more than likely you will just hear from whiny asses that have no real input on this thread and should have just moved along to ones that they can contribute to positively.

__________________
"We need to make books cool again. If you go home with somebody and they don't have books, don't fuck them." John Waters
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction.” Mark Twain
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." Molly Ivins

__________________
"We need to make books cool again. If you go home with somebody and they don't have books, don't fuck them." John Waters
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction.” Mark Twain
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." Molly Ivins

Reading the two articles you cited has me a little confused as to what exactly you are trying to say, so please help me to understand you a little better.

Both situations were where a criminal shot someone.

In the first case, it was a family, and police believe it was not random.

In the second, well, I don't know what is going on with the second exactly. Just bear with me for a moment. According to the article, after an exchange of honking horns, a man gets out of his car and fired once into the car in front. The grandmother then drives nine miles to a JC Penney, and only then realizes her grandchild is shot? There was a second young child in the car as well. The grandmother, after the criminal fired into her car, didn't take off to the police or at least check to see if the little kids were ok, but drove to a store nine miles away?

What's your take on what was going on?

But these are the tales of two criminals. We don't know who they are, how they armed themselves, etc.

You said in an earlier post,
"Reducing a 3 year old child gunned down in a carseat by a citizen exercising his 2A rights to a number is morally dubious, and that's being generous. The 2nd has a human cost."

I don't quite understand what you mean. When we say, for example, two children die each day as a result of being poisoned, we are reducing them to a number, to report them. How would you do it?

Lastly, if you look out into this world, you'll find nearly everything has a human cost.

Again, a criminal. Not a law abiding citizen " exercising " their 2nd amendment rights.

You, as someone that has been here long enough to know better, if a thread doesn't interest you, if it bothers you or if you have nothing worth contributing.... move along.

There are plenty of other threads you can vent on.

Do you have any useful information on the carrying of a 1911?

The Second says nothing about "law abiding citizens"; it arms them all, good, bad, and ugly. And that's a problem.

__________________
"We need to make books cool again. If you go home with somebody and they don't have books, don't fuck them." John Waters
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction.” Mark Twain
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." Molly Ivins

The Second says nothing about "law abiding citizens"; it arms them all, good, bad, and ugly. And that's a problem.

I think you might be missing a point or two. Bear with me.

You state that the Second arms them all, not just the law biding. But we do have laws that limit gun ownership and enact gun control. The ones that make the spotlight are the gun control laws, bans on magazine capacity, bans on cosmetic features (that do nothing but 'look evil') and the oh so effective enactment of gun-free zones?

It is already against the law to murder, so why is there a problem?

The problem here is quite simply stated: Criminals do not obey the laws.

Criminals use guns that are prohibited, modified, or just plain illegal for law-biding citizens to own. Laws will not change that, as the criminals are not obeying the laws.

More laws would be no help whatsoever in addressing the actual problem.

I believe we need to address the 'gun violence' issue at the cause, which is violence. A classic example is Chicago, with incredibly restrictive gun control laws, yet an insane level of violence. As of this post, 631 people have been shot and killed in Chicago. Total number of people shot? 3338. Yep, over three-thousand people have been shot in Chicago. Not by the law biders, that's for sure. You figure out why that level of violence is going on, and allowed to continue, and maybe we all can think of a workable solution.

...but they are not working are they. There is a problem which is growing and the statistics hold that up. The existing gun control laws obviously need to be strengthened and upheld more consistently in your country. (This is not stopping the right to own a gun)

The culture of gun glorification is threatening the security and health of your population. It is a health threat - people are dying.

"Every year in the U.S., more than 30,000 people die from things related to guns.

That puts guns ahead of HIV, Parkinson's disease, malnutrition, hypertension, intestinal infection, peptic ulcer, anemia, viral hepatitis, biliary tract disease, atherosclerosis and fires. Yet, the funding for research on gun violence lags far behind other leading causes of death, according to a study published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association."https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...-health-crisis

"A more recent study published this year in JAMA Internal Medicine found that Florida’s adoption of a “stand your ground” law, which broadened homeowners’ right to use lethal force in self-defense, was linked to an “abrupt and sustained increase” in homicides by firearm."http://www.latimes.com/science/scien...010-story.html

The following video basically represents how the rest of the world views this health threat in USA.
"Say nay to NRA (nonsensical rifle addiction)" https://youtu.be/a-o9pwWUzz0
It really is not a laughing matter though.

This whingy "blah blah blah you can't take our guns away" does contribute to the massive and escalating health issue killing people by the tens of thousands every year in US. Refusal to engage in conversation to reduce this risk most certainly is part of the problem.

A gun does not make a man. Tighter gun control can not strip away masculinity or indeed change sexual orientation, a concept that toeskr appears to struggle with (I wonder why?). Having the courage to not only admit there is a massive health issue in your country but actually promote actions and support policies to reduce this contagion will contribute to saving more lives than owning a gun.

The extent of this health issue is of a proportion in US that other countries (which manage their gun laws sensibly) have a great cause for concern for the spreading of this gun glorification mindset that is costing so many lives.

Perhaps I have it all wrong, the answer must be in reducing or removing gun ownership restrictions. Hand out semi and fully automatic weapons to every family and every school lunch packed with a Glock. Good luck with that.

NRA money is death money bribing your politicians.

____________________________
Literotica is not a gun glorification forum. I see no mention of guns in:
"Welcome to Literotica, your FREE source for the hottest in erotic fiction and fantasy. Literotica features 100% original sex stories from a variety of authors. Literotica accepts quality erotic story submissions from amateur authors and holds story contests for contributors. We offer a huge selection of adult fantasies to choose from, and are always on the lookout for new and exciting ideas. We encourage you to contact us with any comments or suggestions on how we can make this free sex story site more pleasurable for you. Have fun and enjoy yourselves while visiting Literotica Erotic Fiction! All story characters involved in sexual situations on this adult erotic web site are over the age of consent."

...but they are not working are they. There is a problem which is growing and the statistics hold that up. The existing gun control laws obviously need to be strengthened and upheld more consistently in your country.

Way to be unemotional there, NightL. Color me shocked. And some more of you commenting on people's masculinity and sexual orientation. That's the way to change minds, you bet.

I will keep this short. No, the laws are not working, that is the point. The strictest laws, the laws that keep the guns out of the hands of the law biding, do not work, as the criminals do NOT obey those laws. I'll say it again, the criminals do NOT obey those laws, so how exactly would more laws solve anything, since the law biding aren't the problem?

Wow you feel insecure about that as well? Even though I directed that to toerag.

By and large criminals are not the brightest of the bunch, sure there are probably a few exceptions. Tighter controls and registrations of firearms are not going to impact on you - really they are not and you know that. Those restrictions may prevent just one gun being stolen... or more...

You come back time and time again to defend physical objects and a mindset that kills people - you have to live with that.

Wow you feel insecure about that as well? Even though I directed that to toerag.

By and large criminals are not the brightest of the bunch, sure there are probably a few exceptions. Tighter controls and registrations of firearms are not going to impact on you - really they are not and you know that. Those restrictions may prevent just one gun being stolen... or more...

You come back time and time again to defend physical objects and a mindset that kills people - you have to live with that.

Nope, not at all. I merely pointed out the comments as more of your attacks against those you disagree with.

So I ask you to explain how more laws would solve anything, as criminals don't obey the laws, and your response is that new laws won't impact on me, someone who follows the law, but will somehow work on the criminal element? How do you figure that?

A mindset that kills people? Do you mean a mindset that allows people to defend themselves against those who would do them harm? I think if someone bursts into a house, intent on killing the parents and raping the children, the parents get to defend themselves and their kids. I think if someone threatens your life, you get to defend yourself. Or at least have the choice to do so.